Berrington and Eye GWR/LNWR Joint Line 1912 - Layout

[Brassey]

18 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Good to see progress on the B&E. It made me wonder how GWR drivers would learn LNWR/foreign signals. Was it part of the standard training or - more likely perhaps - specialised training sessions?

 

I see there's a door in the sky. The LNWR signalling dept were well connected 

 

I think that the Board of Trade, or some similar body, had standardised signalling practice across the country such as the maximum distance a signal could be from the box to ensure the cables weren't stretched too far and still functioned etc.  So signalling itself was probably pretty common and the GWR and LNWR both used lower quadrant signals.  Route knowledge for a driver was crucial, and that would have included the signalling, but on this line the gradients were probably more vital.  In those days training was on-the-job and learnt from the fireman onwards but I seem to recall that the LNWR did have a model signal set up for training.  I have a 1913 rule book for the joint line which does point out differences such as the different head codes and  their descriptions used by the two companies.  So any signalling differences would have been in that such as bell codes.  

 

By the time of my layout in fact, the GWR had taken over responsibility of the signalling and permanent way from the LNWR (1908) and the 1870's box at B & E had a new GWR lever frame installed.  However, photographic evidence suggests that the LNWR signals remained until closure.  

 

The hole in the sky is where the rain comes through.  It got bigger one night last week when a cast iron sign fell off the wall behind on to it!

 

 

The sign was already broken and sustained only damage to the chipboard mount!

[Mikkel]

Many thanks. It's fascinating that the GWR were responsible for LNWR signals. I find joint lines interesting because we are so used to thinking of companies as having individual practices and being competitive. But joint lines seem to illustrate that it wasn't (isn't) that hard to collaborate when you had to, and there are only so many ways you can run a railway.

 

Sorry to hear about the sign from the sky! I hope the damage to the backscene wasn't too bad either.

[Brassey]

No worries; the backscene is only temporary.  I have a photographic panorama of the location which will replace it in due course.

 

In the meantime I am building a Churchward County 4-4-0 (see blog) which will be one of the largest locos on the layout.  The purpose is to check clearances of cylinders and things before I finally fix platforms and bridges in place.

 

In the meantime I have been experimenting with paint/colours for the bridge which is now built and bar painting and clearance clearance, is ready for installation.

 

 

The long-standing card mock-up of the station building now has a roof part completed which has since this pic acquired chimney stacks.

 

 

Whilst thoughts have turned how to reproduce the tiling for the roof, attention is currently on the tiled waiting hut that was on the up platform (card mock up on platform).  I have failed to find a front-on picture of this structure and a similar, if not identical,  building was at Ford Bridge but alas no better pics of that.  

 

 

I have though unearthed an image of an enamel sign for Millennium Bread which I've recreated and will use on the building.

 

 

 

Wiki reveals that Millennium was a successful miller in late Victorian times but it's landmark mill in London's Dockland was destroyed by a munitions explosion at neighbour Brunner Mond in 1917 which helps date the photo as correct for my period.  It later become part of Spillers.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Brassey

[Mikkel]

Interesting developments! Were the station structures unique designs to that particular joint line?

 

It's probably a coincidence, but if you disregard the windows the waiting hut is quite similar to the GWR platform lock-ups at Long Marston and Lustleigh (I had a go at modelling the former here).  In any case I'm a fan of these minor timber built station structures, they tend to add lots of character.

[Brassey]

1 hour ago, Mikkel said:

quite similar to the GWR platform lock-ups at Long Marston and Lustleigh (I had a go at modelling the former here).

 

Hi Mikkel,

 

The signal boxes on the line were quite distinctive; similar to the older Saxby and Farmer boxes on the Northern section of the LNWR.  The station buildings seem to have been built to a common formula on most of the lines built by Thomas Brassey - Highley on the SVR is a similar example though made of different materials.  Berrington and Eye station was reputedly built from the same red sandstone as Berrington Hall. 

 

I like the finesse of your hut and the roof is an improvement on mine.  I will put pics up once painted.  I experimented with Slaters slates as I have a job lot of Slaters embossed card to get through but I have some Wills sheet that I could try on the station roof though you have got good results with the York product.

 

The windows on the waiting hut and the station building will be a challenge for me because the have many small leaded panes and I can't find any current etched examples that match.

 

Peter

 

[Brassey]

Having arrived with the 14:10 local goods from Shrewsbury, 1505 collects the empties from the yard to take them back to Hereford.

 

 

[Mikkel]

Oooh, very nice. Looks like there's been a good progress on the layout?

 

Can I ask what the ground texture is, it's very effective.

[Brassey]

Hi Mikkel . Thanks.  The ground covering is a mixture of Chinchilla dustIng powder and ash with a bit of coal dust near the track all dusted onto gloss grey paint whilst wet.   This technique gleaned from Gordon Gravett’s book from Wild Swan. The photo is deceptive in that the fence on the far platform is not yet complete.  Along with some other bits, this might get progressed over the bank holiday weekend. 

[Mikkel]

Thanks, that's useful. I have been experimenting a bit with chinchilla dust but didn't feel there was quite enough texture. The ash and coal dust would help, must try that.

[Brassey]

Progress on the layout has continued at what seems like a snails pace despite lockdown.  The platform now has a fence along its length and a waiting hut.  In the distance can be seen a signal box (without windows) and a signal (still unpainted).  The builders have started to tile the roof on the still mocked-up station building but they seem to have evaporated. 

 

This is the traditional view of the station from the overbridge that has now also been built.  That now needs a road covering of Chinchilla dust but building of stock for the layout needs attention.

 

[richbrummitt]

What has been achieved looks so very good. 

[Coal Tank]

On 19/08/2020 at 22:48, Brassey said:

Having arrived with the 14:10 local goods from Shrewsbury, 1505 collects the empties from the yard to take them back to Hereford.

 

 

That is a really nice photo

John 

[Penlan]

That sweep through the station looks very nice, and wide platforms too.
The 'crossover' looks like a 'Barry Slip' 
Glad somebody else is modeling one, the electrics will prove interesting  

 

Edited December 5, 2020 by Penlan

[Brassey]

5 hours ago, Coal Tank said:

That is a really nice photo

John 

Thanks John. Peter

[Simond]

They're certainly Barry Slips.  (Barry Slips did a turn as Tom Jones’ support act, I heard) 

 

I don’t think the wiring should prove too difficult,  Always feed the stock rails, and isolate the frogs at all four places, and feed them according to the tiebar at the other end.

 

atb

Simon

[Regularity]

24 minutes ago, Simond said:

They're certainly Barry Slips.  (Barry Slips did a turn as Tom Jones’ support act, I heard) 

 

I don’t think the wiring should prove too difficult,  Always feed the stock rails, and isolate the frogs at all four places, and feed them according to the tiebar at the other end.

 

atb

Simon

And fit frog juicers if using DCC, but in both that and DC, set the route before setting off!

[Simond]

Juicers are an expensive solution compared to a microswitch, and, they don’t allow the use use of DC, if your layout is switchable.

 

the Barry slip solution will give lots of siding space in a given area, but does not allow easy shunting from the sidings on the left of the diagonal to those on the right, unless one or both sides is laid as loops.  Two diagonal spines would provide that, of course.  
 

I might go looking for trackplans where Barry slips were used, to see how they did it.

 

atb

Simon

[Regularity]

56 minutes ago, Simond said:

Juicers are an expensive solution compared to a microswitch, and, they don’t allow the use use of DC, if your layout is switchable.

Unless you join MERG: such a solution is in the latest issue.

Whilst microswitches are fine, they don’t permit one to run up close to the points, and to throw them at the last minute (for example with the shunter hitching a ride on the cab footsteps) nor to operate against the points as can happen on the real railway - including the potential for derailment as on the prototype. 
Juicers can also be used to detect a contrary setting of the points, and to fire a motor to throw the switch as well as the polarity.

Yes, some extra expense, but it increases the verisimilitude of operation, so worth considering against the cost of (say) another loco.

[Brassey]

 

Thanks for the input guys.  As can be seen from my entries of March 2018, the trackwork has been down for years.  I am not sure I appreciate the difference between a Barry slip and a single slip in this application but I built it as a single slip. 

 

 

At the time I used the 1909 LNWR track specs as provided in the diagrams on sale via the LNWR Society.  Richard Foster supplied the signal box workings courtesy of the SRS and, despite there being 6 sets of "points" on the layout, there are only 3 levers (switches) as all work in tandem.  All are operated by Tortoise motors which also change the polarity.  I can't say the slip wasn't a challenge in wiring as I got one wire mixed up which took an age to resolve.  The electrics work happly on both swiched DC and DCC throughout.

 

The main challenge has been getting the TOU's sorted which I think is the main cause of derailments as can be seen from my previous observation:

 

On 04/03/2018 at 13:45, Brassey said:

The main challenge is to get the up and down trailing entries to the yard working without derailment.  As was common in pre-grouping days, entries into yards off a main line were always trailing for safety.  The challenge is to get a goods train to reverse across these formations which is one of the most difficult movements on a model railway.

 

My main concern when planning the layout was the cant on the curve throughout the lines and how I would get pointwork across from one line to another without creating a kink.  The outer rails at their extreme are 2mm higher than the inner (scale 6").  I built the yard, which is flat, 1 mm below the main lines.  I think the ply wood road bed I used bent to conform to a shape that avoided any kinks and avoided any problem that way.  The other issue is that the point work on the main lines are all on curves, I am no engineer, but centrifugal force means that there is a tendency for vehicles to be forced to the outer road and not take the diverging road.  I have rebuilt some of the point blades which has improved things but it still persists.  So my conclusion is that it is the fairly basic TOU system that I used that is the cause.  I have bought some Exactoscale Tortoise TOU to replace the crude system I have.  But to install these easily and avoid crawling under means dismantling the layout to turn it over.  This I am currently loathed to do as the layout is wedged into my railway box room at the moment and only just fits whilst a better location is planned and it is moved again.  And for the reason stated below acknowledged 3 years ago, this is not a priority:

 

On 04/03/2018 at 13:45, Brassey said:

As previously stated, there were only 4 local goods trains timetabled; 2 in each direction.  On closer examination, the LNWR Down local goods was CR (Call as Required).  The LNWR timetables don’t give arrive and departure times but looking at the times from the previous and following stations, no time was allowed for shunting at Berrington and Eye for these trains anyway.  The GWR local goods however, have arrival and departure times shown and were both allowed 10 minutes at Berrington and Eye so these would have done the shunting if any.  So that’s 2 trains out of 90 per weekday going through the station that would have entered the yard!  So my agonising over the point work only effects less than 2% of the trains.

 

So my focus is on building the 98% of the trains that did not use the point work and the only work is to reattach the point blades that often come desoldered.  

 

[Simond]

the formation centre of this is a single slip
 

 

These are Barry slips

 

with a single or double slip (or compound as the GW called them), you can go straight on both straight roads and curve on one or two sides.

 

with a Barry slip, you can only go straight on one straight road, (the diagonal in the picture) the other straight road doesn’t exist!

atb

Simon

[kandc_au]

18 minutes ago, Simond said:

These are Barry slips

 

with a single or double slip (or compound as the GW called them), you can go straight on both straight roads and curve on one or two sides.

 

with a Barry slip, you can only go straight on one straight road, (the diagonal in the picture) the other straight road doesn’t exist!

atb

Simon

Simon,
Apart from the road down the guts ....there is NO straight road!!

Khris

[Brassey]

3 hours ago, Simond said:

the formation centre of this is a single slip

 

Yes apologies for the depth of focus on the picture but I did build it as a single slip though with much more extreme curvature than the original as has the whole layout. 

 

Talking of compromise, the prototype picture shows that the railway boundary was marked throughout by a hedge.   I was reluctant to make about 6 metres of model hedge, so my layout has fencing.  Stations further along the line did have fences so it's no out of keeping.

[Brassey]

Returning to operations, such documents are useful in planning:

 

 

My question now is, how long did it take to change loco at a main station.  For example, one express is timed only 2 minutes at Hereford and is listed as to set down passengers only, so no time to change a loco.  Others have longer such as 15 minutes.  Is that enough to change a loco?  Received wisdom is that the Bristol GWR engines ran expresses through to Shrewsbury but was that always the case?  Did some locos get changed at Hereford?

Edited December 6, 2020 by Brassey
typo

[Simond]

If anyone fancies having a go at Barry slips, here’s a ready-made track plan...

 

 

confusingly, the photo above is not at Barry, it’s these, to the north west of Newport’s Alexandra dock. As you can see, the slips are on a diagonal road crossing the loops, and they are loops,  Effectively, it appears that the diagonal road halves the length of the loops, and allows a train to be drawn out from behind another.  It’s staggering to think how many wagons...

 

g’night

Simon

 

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

Fortunately, "Barry slips" were also used at simpler locations. Dorking Town (Dorking West) had one in the goods yard leading to the coal siding.